CNQQ vs. IBIC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.22, they often move in opposite directions. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.

Performance

CNQQ vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 12.03% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.34% return.

CNQQ

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 7.11%
• YTD: 12.03%
• 6M: 12.44%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBIC

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 2.34%
• 6M: 2.50%
• 1Y: 4.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNQQ vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF	12.03%	-5.96%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	2.34%	0.57%

Correlation

The correlation between CNQQ and IBIC is -0.22, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2025	-0.22

Return for Risk

CNQQ vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IBIC

IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 98
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 98

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CNQQ vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNQQ	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	4.99	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	3.48	-3.15

Drawdowns

CNQQ vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and IBIC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNQQ	IBIC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.82%	-0.90%	-16.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.26%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.09%	-0.16%	-0.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.19%	-0.10%	-9.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.07%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CNQQ	IBIC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.32%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.67%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.37%	0.90%	+23.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.37%	1.58%	+22.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.37%	1.58%	+22.79%

CNQQ vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNQQ vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, less than IBIC's 3.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF	0.23%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	3.59%	4.43%	4.65%	0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNQQ and IBIC in my portfolio?

CNQQ and IBIC have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNQQ or IBIC?

On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNQQ or IBIC?

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CNQQ or IBIC?

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 0.23% for CNQQ.

What is the main difference between CNQQ and IBIC?

CNQQ is categorized as China Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.10% for IBIC.